MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006782528

Reforma kanadského azylového systému

2012· dissertation· cs· W3006782528 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lenka Staňková

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2012
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical sciencePhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Master thesis The Reform of Canada's Asylum System deals with the refugee issue in Canada. Canada's asylum system has been the subject of controversy almost since its inception in the 1970s. The asylum system has been crippled by a cumbersome inland refugee determination process which resulted in a huge backlog of unresolved asylum claims. Even though various governments have tried to reform the dysfunctional system, newly implemented measures only have led to even bigger backlog and longer delays, which encourage people who are not in need of protection to make an asylum claim knowing they will be able to skip the regular but lengthy immigration process and have immediate access to a range of generous social benefits. The thesis analyzes the problems of the existing asylum system which are seen in a general access to the refugee determination process, in its expensiveness, in the inefficiency of the immigration authorities, and in long delays allowing the asylum seekers to live and work in Canada for many years. Analyzing the expected outcomes of the new reform, the thesis assesses whether the new proposal of Canadian refugee and asylum policy will be finally successful in resolving the problems that are crippling Canada's asylum system or whether it will be rather classified just as another...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.592

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207